Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    May 18, 2014 2:30am-3:01am PDT

2:30 am
map of ukraine in that textbook. that textbook doesn't provide our students for the ability to look at [inaudible] comments about un intervention. it doesn't allow us to look at president obama's conversations about how we're going to intervene or not. what about the relationship between the united states and germany and what is the socioeconomic implications of the invasion of that territory. so technology, all it does is provide our students with real world, realtime ability to engage in very deep conversations that are not just conversations centered on a chapter, read the even pages or odd pages. quite frankly, we're san francisco so this is part of who we are, this is the dna of our community that our students
2:31 am
would have this kind of technology. now, i won't say this is going to be an easy lift. it'll be a big lift for us. it'll require us all to row in the same direction, require us to make a compelling case to the community and business community in san francisco, but i know we can do it, because as i read through our vision 2025, this is what we're talking about, vision 2025. the graduate of 2025. and i had the opportunity this afternoon to attend an event with auto desk with several of the commissioners, president fewer was there, commissioner mendoza-mcdonnell was there, and probably 50 of our teachers were there. these were our first group of teachers that implemented the middle school initiative where they were trained on how to use technology and transform how they teach.
2:32 am
the excitement in that room was palpable. they were excited, engaged, scared. several teachers told me they were scared because they figured out there was a lot more to learn, but excited to learn more. i had a teacher show me a in physics describing the difference between speed and velocity. so how many of us would do that right now? so what these children did is she was very clear with them, these are the five characteristics i want you to have in your presentation, figure it out. what'd they do? they engaged with other students and they filmed movies where they demonstrated the difference between speed and velocity, developed rubrics, they filmed each other, wrote a narrative and were able to give
2:33 am
feedback using software that allowed them to give realtime feed back on the presentation, what was powerful, what was not. that's 21st, 22nd learning. that's san francisco. so we're very excited about how we go forward and we look forward to hearing your comments and we will come back with the finished digital district plan. >> i'm going to turn this over to go through the [inaudible]. >> just spent time talking about access in the classroom and in the school buildings, as well
2:34 am
as our students so in addition to that we wanted to find out exactly what parents preferences were in terms of receiving communications from the district that technology enabled so thank you. i'm the executive director of communications for sfusd. this is the first survey of this kinds we did in this district and we have a lot of -- i think overall a lot of assumptions because a lot of low income families, a lot of english learners. we thought we couldn't do a lot of [inaudible] because we assumed a lot of our parents wouldn't have access to technology. so we're going to show you what we learned and make some recommendations at the end of that. i want to thank the research planning and accountability department, as well as it and the office of community and
2:35 am
family engagement who helped us refine the survey before we sent it out. and i want to thank our principals who threw themselves behind this survey. they found the data would be incredibly useful to them and we had great participation overall, with 94 of our schools returning a large portion of surveys and we had 16,000 correspondents. i'd like to turn over the findings to joyce. she's overall someone who saw the need for this and was able to help usher this along.
2:36 am
>> we actually tried to go back to several of the schools with approximately a zero percent response rate that had very high proportions of african american and latino students. we got about 900 percent more responses and about a percentage point or more each for the response rate for the
2:37 am
latino and african american families. our main finding is most households have internet. the district average is about 94 percent. it ranges from the high 70 percent for american indian and alaska native families, up to 98.4 percent for our white families. as you can see below the district average of 94 percent is our say moe wan families, latino families, african american families and our american indian families. not only that, we looked at education level as an approximation of socioeconomic income. this corresponds with our lunch program data and as advised by rpa, asking people for their highest level of education was
2:38 am
much less sensitive than their level of income. as i previously noted, all rerespondents for the district have about 94 percent internet access. i'm sure it's not that surprising to found out that internet access declined slightly with the level of education completed, but even with households with less than a high school education, about 86 percent of them report having internet access. we asked parents what their primary device was. as you can see for the district, most people do tend to use computer to access the internet, with the second being mobile phone, the third being tablets. the number for tablets was actually a little higher than we thought so the average is about 20 percent or so or 23 percent of tablet use. the interesting thing here is
2:39 am
that our white families reported the lowest use of tablet device, at 15 percent, the next lowest was african american families at 18 percent. most of the people report using computer most are african american and latino families use mobile phones to access the internet by about 10 to 20 percent, higher than the computer, which obviously differs from the rest of the district. and our american indian and pacific islander families use computer and mobile phone about half, half. we also asked households how many -- if their children had access to a computer with internet. about 84 percent of them do. this looks a lot like the range of households with the
2:40 am
minorities a little lower than the district average. 60 percent of children report having access to mobile device with internet, and our white families have the lowest number of children who report having access to one of these devices. as you can see the latino, pacific islander and african american families have 60 percent saying their children have access to those. the percentage of children with mobile device access is actually inversed so families with possibly a high school
2:41 am
level of education, less than high school or some college, this is where they're using -- the children have the most access to mobile devices with internet, as opposed to the over four year college, which is only about 50 percent. we also asked parents about how they would prefer for us to communicate with them so urgent communication preferences in terms of an emergency, peoples' first choice was to be informed by phone call very dramatically, but we also found that people very much preferred getting a text message as a secondary choice. we also asked them for their top six non urgent communication preferences, such as school events. a lot of parents wanted email, with printed handouts being sent home with their child as a
2:42 am
strong second choice. we have about 20 percent tablet device. so we had some first tier sort of low hanging fruit recommendations, only it's not low hanging fruit because they require resources so our take away is that we do want to move forward with creating a mobile version of our website, particularly with information that parents are seeking out
2:43 am
most often that we currently don't have a text messaging system except for in the cases of an extreme citywide emergency type of situation, so we would like to see how we can figure out getting a text messaging system, possibly -- certainly for emergency situations and other important things and enrollment deadlines and other ways of communicating, especially with families we are trying to increase our on time enrollment with. finally, while it might be obvious that parents might use emails these days, we don't have any way of collecting systematically across the district parents' email addresses and don't have that information in our student information system so we'd like to figure out how we can move that forward and make that an option for families as well. that is it. i think we can now turn to questions about the overall
2:44 am
presentation, both the digital district and this presentation and we'll have mr. ryan join us back up here. >> commissioner norton. >> i was really kind of mystified by this chart, which is the inverse -- you know, the children with the mobile device actually rises as the parents education level falls. i mean, do you have any interpretation of that or any sort of thoughts about that? >> well, i suspect a lot of it is financial on the mobile devices are easier to acquire than a computer. you don't have to sign up for additional internet plan, which
2:45 am
costs a substantial chunk of money, as most of us probably know. you can get this with your phone, you have the family plans and et cetera, and as i found in, like, a lot of research in other areas,, like, a lot of more low tech areas or areas with more low income families, they tend to use the mobile devices the most to access the internet. >> in general, i mean, how representative do you think, based on the responses that you got and where they came from, how representative or -- you know, that's hard to say what the margin of error is, but i mean, i'm sort of wondering, are we only looking at a part of the district? i think when we talk about this kind of topic, we often tend to say what about all the parents that don't answer the survey or what about the parents that don't speak english or whatever it is. how representative or accurate do you think these findings are?
2:46 am
>> we've looked at a lot of other research across the country in terms of parent access and preferences and this does seem to track similarly to those types of -- for example, overall mobile devices are more common in low income families. we also looked at what the mission promise neighborhood schools got back in terms of a response that they did for a survey about family technology resources and we found that the responses to that survey were very similar to this so to the degree that we can, i think we can make pretty good assumptions on this day that that it's pretty representative. >> it begs the question -- the other piece of this, the digital district piece, i mean, when carlos was here, you know, one of his first proposals was let's spend $1 million a year getting every teacher a laptop
2:47 am
an putting it on a four year refresh cycle and i think we need to do that. one of my questions for you is have you identified actually funding for this or is it more like this is an ask as part of the fundamental development strategy. >> i'll take a first stab at it. great question. it's a yes and yes. so we're actually looking at identifying funding that would address the laptop issue for educator as part of our general fund, but also is going to be an ask that we're asking from private funders as well to help us move forward. i think it makes sense for us to have a three year refresh cycle so we're always getting the latest equipment in place, but it's been a fascinating
2:48 am
journey because it also requires you have a really robust acid management system where you can track and account for that kind of a system so that requires some enterprise systems as well, which is dependent on technology. so this is -- it's all interconnected and it's all leveraging upon itself, but that's a very good question. i think we're finally at a place where we're actually moving in that direction in a very tangible way. i think there are some more details on that. >> thank you. i wanted to make one piece of additional information. so the educator laptop devices -- if you noticed in the presentation there was a reference to doing that over two years so we had a a series
2:49 am
about which educators would be in the first group and the highest priority and we can describe more about that if you 're curious, but as far as the funding, it is from the general fund, but i want to also add that for '14, '15, which is the first phase of that two year rollout, the funding source is from qtea. if you recall, qtea has who major components, one is teacher er compensation, the other is not. the largest is for the educator devices. >> i guess the last observation really is sort of along the same line, but it seems to me that the more we can invest in technology that makes -- i mean, there -- from this data
2:50 am
you showed us, there's a relatively large group of families, that once you can send them a text message or email in their language, you kind of have taken care of that school home communication in large part. then you have to focus on that other smaller group of families, but the ones that we most need to reach and are the toughest to reach. it seems to me that making these investments in technology so we can get this group of families out of the way so we're communicating with them, getting them the information they need, now we need to free up resources to really reach out to the families that are going to take that extra effort, that take the home visits or whatever it is to reach. and so i do -- i think it's great we're thinking this way because i hear a lot from more advantaged families, why is the
2:51 am
district so backwards in technology. it does seem like if we can just do the investment that we need to do to get over that hump and get those families, you know, access to information online where they will be very resourced and go after it, then we have resources to free up for the families that we know we're not reaching. >> commissioner maufus. >> thank you. i had -- in regards, i just want to make a comment to what you said commissioner norton. i can understand that sort of thinking which would get us over a huge hump and serve so many families, but i also see that as disadvantaging the families, that really we need
2:52 am
to get to as well because that puts them behind them again. and that's always sort of the balance we're trying not to do -- >> that's not my intent at all. >> of course not. i just wanted to note that because as you were talking about it, i was trying to think that makes sense to try to get a huge, you know, group of our families taken care of, but then that means our other families are waiting. yeah, it's one of those dilemmas that i trust [inaudible] be working through. my first question and comment and that's the only question i have in regards to this survey, you know, in regards to how do we get emails for all of our families as quickly as possible and i'm just going to throw out and hope and assume you're all on this too because this is your area, that we are all still working with our education placement center and trying to pull that information because those families are
2:53 am
coming right to us, why not get it there. and you know, what's the cost of changing our emergency card because we do that when children go to a new school. how do we get that taken care of when we get that on the emergency card? that seems simple enough. i already know that you've got all that stuff, but i wanted to voice that just in case. and i really appreciate and i did speak with miss -- my -- maybe earlier or in april where you said you had gone back to school sites for a second path to ask again for families who hadn't turned in the survey so i really appreciate the extra effort to really pull in the valuable information from families that hadn't responded so i wanted to acknowledge that and thank you both very much for doing the extra hard work. again, the in your opinion is
2:54 am
so significant that you were able to get that many surveys and responses, truly, i think may be a bit unprecedented for our efforts in getting surveys back from families. so thank you very much and for working with school sites and all they have on their plates. thank you very much. you set the bar and you keep hitting it. good luck with that. and then my other question, which was for mr. kensey and mr. ryan. on slide six in the guiding principles which talks about the early years and middle years and high school years, seems unusual for us to be -- and maybe i'm misunderstood, to imagine that we're fully expecting high schoolers to start creating. wouldn't we be expecting that in the early years? i mean, that's -- why -- we're asking them to do that in written form, why not asking
2:55 am
our younger ones to do that in the early years in digital form. that's my first question. >> you would expect somebody to be creating and consuming at all grade levels, but it's a mixture of the two that we're actually considering in that -- i guess it's the cellular radio. so it's a mixture of the two and so -- and there's also the usability. at a former company what we found was for instance, things like when a student was under 7 or 8 years old, the mouse had
2:56 am
to operate differently and we had to actually use different touch points that they could access to. and so you -- the actual usability of a tablet and what you're touching is actually better for the younger kids, but it doesn't mean they're not creating. it's simply that the creation that as a student grows, they do more creation and less of the consuming of learning the foundational layers that allow them to create new things too. yes, there is not an absolute one or the other, simply a mixture. >> thank you. and i think sort of -- i was thinking sort of side barring with vice president here, but i feel like i see a combination coming to the curriculum meeting as you're talking about
2:57 am
what online curriculum -- i just wanted to hear around what online content we have and how that sort of gets ramped up and i definitely will give a heads up to our curriculum instruction department because i'd like to hear how they're working towards that goal as well. did you have a comment? >> maybe it's the microphone. >> and example would be the rolling out this year of the -- or next year, the core curriculum in mathematics. that is meant to be a purely digital roll out eventually. but because all of the assets are in either pdf, word, powerpoint, excel form, they're
2:58 am
digital, the -- and they're being, going to be delivered through a learning management system. currently they sit in a system called egmoto where all our pilot teachers are accessing those materials. the difference is currently most of those assets, because we can't rely on technology in the classroom, are analog at their base. you -- they are pdf, pictures of pages. what we imagine as we grow as a digital district is that those become dynamic and so that students are interacting with them on a screen rather than simply printing them out and looking at them on the screen. >> thank you. that was a good short answer, i appreciate that . and then the last question i had, which was on slide 15, which talks about the digital
2:59 am
district will be executed over a three year period. i guess i'm going to ask a couple of questions and maybe you can give me a paragraph of an answer. i'm curious and maybe you mentioned it and i missed the front end of your presentation, but how are we [inaudible] how are we going from the old process, all the work we're in the midst of, and transitioning into this new three year period. is there any overlap? also as i look at this one, two and three year, if we're talking about connectivety here
3:00 am
and educator devices and what they need to be able to do, the management systems and the resiliency don't start until year two and then sort of using your airline, airplane example, would that not need to start in year one as well so we're creating the infrastructure and creativity. maybe i'm misunderstanding how they align. >> i think they all fit together in a chicken and egg type scenario. so we talk about the shift in funding. it is going to take some time to shift the funding how we're doing it now so currently we are looking for the next couple years to go out and raise private funds. and then the goal is as we lay in this plans, we start the testing [inaudible] see how it works, then it's